¿El tipo de papel afecta el rendimiento de la lectura? Estudio de concordancia utilizando papel de caña de azúcar

Rodrigo M. Torres; Gustavo J. Galperín; Juan S. Rivero; Pablo Daponte; Daniel Sabella; María J. Botta; Nicolás Garcés; Roberto Albertazzi; Virginia Zanutigh

doi:10.70313/2718.7446.v17.n02.326

Authors

Rodrigo M. Torres ROMAT Creator Center, Colonia Avellaneda (Entre Ríos), Argentina
Gustavo J. Galperín Hospital Lagleyze, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Juan S. Rivero Oftalmo Medicina Ocular, Córdoba, Argentina
Pablo Daponte Centro Integral de Salud Visual Dr. Daponte, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Daniel Sabella Instituto Oftalmológico Mar del Plata, Mar del Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina
María J. Botta Consultorios Botta Ruiz, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Nicolás Garcés Clínica Santa Lucía, San Juan, Argentina
Roberto Albertazzi Centro de Ojos Quilmes, Quilmes, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Virginia Zanutigh Centro de Ojos Quilmes, Quilmes, Buenos Aires, Argentina

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70313/2718.7446.v17.n02.326

Keywords:

sugarcane paper, near visión, reading, reading time, blinking rate

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the concordance level with respect to reading performance, between standard white paper and paper produced from sugarcane.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was developed to compare four versions of the Byromat-CAO reading chart, defined as PBlack, PNatBlack, PBlue and PNatBlue, according to paper type (Nat: Ledesma paper, Argentina) and ink color (black “Black” or blue: “Blue”). The population evaluated was ophthalmologists attending a congress (November 2023). Near visual acuity (VA), total reading time and number of blinks were evaluated. A Pearson linear regression test was performed and the level of agreement was analyzed using the Bland-Altman test (p<0.05 = statistically significant).

Results: A total of 104 ophthalmologists participated, with a mean age of 39.1 ±12.4 years. No statistical differences were found for VA (p: 0.72), obtaining a positive correlation (R2:0.83; p: 0.02), with a good agreement level in the Bland-Altman analysis. Regarding total reading time, when comparing between independent groups, a lower reading time was observed for PNatBlack vs PBlack (p 0.03) and for PNatBlue vs PBlue (p: 0.04). Flicker frequency was statistically lower (p<0.001) for PNatBlue and PNatBlack.

Conclusions: Near visual acuity proved equivalent between the four variants, however reading time and blink rate were lower, with the sugarcane paper, resulting in advantages for reading performance.

References

Foreman J, Salim AT, Praveen A et al. Association between digital smart device use and myopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Digit Health 2021; 3: e806-e818.

Yang Z, Wang X, Zhang S et al. Pediatric Myopia Progression During the COVID-19 Pandemic Home Quarantine and the Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Public Health 2022; 10: 835449.

Biswas S, El Kareh A, Qureshi M et al. The influence of the environment and lifestyle on myopia. J Physiol Anthropol 2024; 43: 7.

Mehra D, Galor A. Digital Screen Use and Dry Eye: A Review. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila) 2020; 9: 491-497.

Al-Mohtaseb Z, Schachter S, Shen Lee B et al. The Relationship Between Dry Eye Disease and Digital Screen Use. Clin Ophthalmol 2021; 15: 3811-3820.

Lin YJ, Yen JY, Lin PC et al. Circadian typologies and insomnia in individuals with internet gaming disorder comorbid with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Sci Rep 2023; 13: 12764.

Portmann R, Beyerle U, Davin E et al. Global forestation and deforestation affect remote climate via adjusted atmosphere and ocean circulation. Nat Commun 2022; 13: 5569.

Ou X, Jiang H. The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Firm Performance: Evidence from the Pulp and Paper Industry in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2023; 20: 2982.

Mahmud MA, Anannya FR. Sugarcane bagasse - A source of cellulosic fiber for diverse applications. Heliyon 2021; 7: e07771.

Shabbirahmed AM, Haldar D, Dey P et al. Sugarcane bagasse into value-added products: a review. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2022; 29: 62785-62806.

Sharma D, Agrawal S, Nagpal R et al. Production of eco-friendly and better-quality sugarcane bagasse paper using crude xylanase and pectinase biopulping strategy. 3 Biotech 2023; 13: 61.

Torres RM, River J, Daponte P. Cartillas de lectura en escala logarítmica: ¿por qué el test de Jaeger es obsoleto en el presente? Oftalmol Clin Exp 2023; 16: e320-e331.

Virgili G, Acosta R, Bentley SA et al. Reading aids for adults with low vision. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018; 4: CD003303.

Wilkins AJ, Sihra N, Myers A. Increasing reading speed by using colours: issues concerning reliability and specificity, and their theoretical and practical implications. Perception 2005; 34: 109-120.

Uccula A, Enna M, Mulatti C. Colors, colored overlays, and reading skills. Front Psychol 2014; 5: 833.

Monger LJ, Wilkins AJ, Allen PM. Pattern glare: the effects of contrast and color. Front Psychol 2015; 6: 1651.

Maleki A. Why does library holding format really matter for book impact assessment? Modelling the relationship between citations and altmetrics with print and electronic holdings. Scientometrics 2022; 127:1129-1160.

Radner W. Reading charts in ophthalmology. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2017; 255: 1465-1482.

Laubrock J, Kliegl R. The eye-voice span during reading aloud. Front Psychol 2015; 6: 1432.

De Luca M, Pontillo M, Primativo S et al. The eye-voice lead during oral reading in developmental dyslexia. Front Hum Neurosci 2013; 7: 696.

Adedeji VI, Vasilev MR, Kirkby JA, Slattery TJ. Return-sweep saccades in oral reading. Psychol Res 2022; 86: 1804-1815.

De Looze C, Dehsarvi A, Suleyman N et al. structural correlates of overt sentence reading in mild cognitive impairment and mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease. Curr Alzheimer Res 2022; 19: 606-617.

Terao Y, Tokushige SI, Inomata-Terada S et al. How do patients with Parkinson’s disease and cerebellar ataxia read aloud? Eye-voice coordination in text reading. Front Neurosc 2023; 17: 1202404.

Napoli PE, Nioi M, Mangoni L et al. Fourier-domain OCT imaging of the ocular surface and tear film dynamics: a review of the state of the art and an integrative model of the tear behavior during the inter-blink period and visual fixation. J Clin Med 2020; 9: 668.

Wolffsohn JS, Lingham G, Downie LE et al. TFOS lifestyle: impact of the digital environment on the ocular surface. Ocul Surf 2023; 28: 213-252.

Mitchell T, Murri M, Pflugfelder SC. Video viewing blink rate in normal and dry eyes. Eye Contact Lens 2021; 47: 442-444.

Erkol G, Kiziltan ME, Uluduz D, Uzun N. Somatosensory eye blink reflex in peripheral facial palsy. Neurosci Lett 2009; 460: 201-204.

Defazio G, Hallett M, Jinnah HA et al. Blepharospasm 40 years later. Mov Disord 2017; 32: 498-509.

Bentivoglio AR, Bressman SB, Cassetta E et al. Analysis of blink rate patterns in normal subjects. Mov Disord 1997; 12: 1028-1034.

Abusharha AA. Changes in blink rate and ocular symptoms during different reading tasks. Clin Optom (Auckl) 2017; 9: 133-138.

Gisler C, Ridi A, Hennebert J et al. Automated detection and quantification of circadian eye blinks using a contact lens sensor. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2015; 4: 4.

Mbamba M, Mzumara T, Chisale P, Afonne J. The distribution of blinkrate among Malawian young adults: a cross-sectional study. Sci Rep 2023; 13: 2039.